When all participants can participate in all topics...

In Farsi, I call it "Miz-e Dav-var" that can be translated as "rotating table". It is a facilitation technique. In English, it has got different names: Carousel technique or Rotating Review, World Café, Knowledge Café or Charette procedure. It is a brainstorming technique used by facilitators, when there are different subjects in a session and all would like to participate. 

For a definition, I quote from the website of readwritethink.org a part about Carousel technique or rotating review. The technique here has been used for students in a classroom:

"While taking part in Carousel Brainstorming, small groups of students rotate around the classroom, stopping at various “stations” for a designated period of time (usually 1-2 minutes).  At each station, students activate their prior knowledge of a topic or concept and share their ideas with their small group.  Each group posts their ideas at each station for all groups to read." (http://www.readwritethink.org/professional-development/strategy-guides/brainstorming-reviewing-using-carousel-30630.html)

I read in selba.org that the technique of World Café has been created and developed by Juanita Brow and William Isaacs in their book The World Café. As explained in Selba.org the technique is as follows: 

"The big group is divided in small groups of 4-5 people sitting around a table with a paper tablecloth —to write, draw, or doodle in the midst of the conversation— and talking about a given subject presented under the form of a question. In each table there is a table 'host' who stays at the same table throughout the process. After 20-30 minutes the general host invites participants to change tables. The table host explains briefly the essence of the previous conversation to the guests who arrive for the next round. After three rounds of progressive conversation there is a dialogue among the whole group with the intention of gathering and recording key ideas, questions or insights that might be useful for action planning or other purposes." (http://www.selba.org/EngTaster/Social/Facilitation/FacilitationTechniques.html)

In Wikipedia, it has been written that the World Café originated at the home of Juanita Brown and David Isaacs in 1995 when a "large circle" conversation became disrupted by rain. It is called World Café since A café ambience is created in order to facilitate conversation. The knowledge café or K-Café (and sometimes conservation café) shares certain features with The World Cafe. I think it is good to have a look at this slide to know more about knowledge café: http://www.slideshare.net/dgurteen/introduction-to-the-knowledge-cafe

Of course, the technique may go back more deeply into history if we call it Charette procedure. I found the following part in Mind Tools: 

"The Charette Procedure (sometimes spelled 'Charrette')... involves organizing people into several small groups, each of which brainstorms ideas one-after-the-other until everyone involved has had a chance to contribute fully. Derived from the French word for wagon, it comes from the practice of architecture students in the early 1800s, who used carts to rush their drawings from one place to another to get final approvals. In much the same way, when you use the Charette Procedure, you take the ideas generated by a group, and cart them over to the next group, for them to be built upon, refined, and finally prioritized." 

After this introduction about the different names and history, I have to emphasize that this technique is not only talking, it is a technique of thinking and producing something that is created through brainstorming while everyone in the group has participated in the production process. and of course, it is a different technique from Open Space Technology where there are more people and it may take longer for several days. Meanwhile, speed geeking is a similar tool used for presentation.

I have used the technique several times in different contexts (villages and urban communities). It works. People love to become involved in such a model of thinking and working together.

The procedure for facilitating:  

1. The content: how many questions are on the tables? Questions are related and fill in a bigger puzzle. 
2. Arrange the setting and make ready what would be needed for each group (paper, markers, flip charts,...)
3. Explain for the participants how the technique is going to be done.
4. Divide the participants into small groups of 5 - 7 people (sometimes more; it depends how many participants are in your workshop and how questions have to be responded). If there are four questions and there are 24 participants, then you have four small groups of six participants.
5. One person is chosen as group facilitator (it can be called host or recorder). Choosing can be done by the workshop facilitator or by the group; as he or she needs to have facilitation skills, it would be better to be selected by the workshop facilitator. 
6. Provide each group with a discussion topic or question. 
7. Establish a time limit (8 to 10 minutes) for the groups to generate ideas in response to the topic. The time limit can determined through looking at : 1) number of the questions; 2) how deep the questions are; 3) participants energy; and 4) and the time you have for the workshop.   
8. At the end of the time period, we can do in two ways: a) Participants sit in their place and the group facilitator moves and takes the responses from their group and rotate to the next group. b) Each group of participants moves clock-wise or counter clock-wise and the group facilitators remain in their own place.
9. Once the group facilitator joins his/her new group (for 8.a) or once each group of participants joins the next facilitator (for 8.b), the group is asked to review the information generated by the previous group and quickly add any other ideas or comments they have. 
10. Repeat the the previous step, until each group has had an opportunity to discuss every issue. Some facilitators prefer that during the last rotation, each group should prioritize the most significant or important ideas generated on that topic. 
11. The total group is reconvened. Each group facilitator summarizes the discussion and priorities generated by the topic. The workshop facilitator may connect the ideas if needed. The puzzle may become complete at his stage.

Revolving tables, Rotating Review, Carousel technique, Charette procedure, World Cafe or Knowledge Cafe all seem to be one facilitation technique: All Participants Participate in All Topics, and do not forget, it is not a decision-making method.

This method is useful when the facilitator is involved in carrying out a SWOT workshop. I have also used it in knowledge sharing workshops when there are five or six topics at the end.

A facilitator pays attention to "hospitality of local people" and their "art"

Parvin Pakzadmanesh is a local facilitator. In her weblog Community Gender Empowerment, she has posted an extraordinary series of photos - coming from various community-based projects that seem to be invaluable. Also she introduces two important notions of community-based activity: local people's hospitality and local art. Do not hesitate to have a look at these photos. 

A glance at the definition of "group" from a facilitator's point of view

To have a clear definition of "group" is a necessary part of work for any professional facilitator. Before starting to think about the definition, let's see why such definition is important. Any facilitator works with groups of people; a mentor may be with one mentee (Wikipedia definition: mentorship is a personal developmental relationship in which a more experienced or more knowledgeable person helps to guide a less experienced or less knowledgeable person), but a coach, a facilitator or even a social worker work with groups of people. If a facilitator can have a clear definition of group, then this will help him/her a great deal in "group-building", since he or she knows what part of the group has to be strengthened to help the group to shape. For instance, if we say that a group "is a two or more people who have one common goal", during facilitating the work of a group, our mind automatically or even consciously goes towards "defining a common goal" since based on the definition, this is the common goal which is the most important element of the definition. One may ask whether there are other definitions or not ?

In my workshops on facilitation, this is always among the starters. I always begin the training workshop with the definitions and request the participants to think about these four major concepts: "human being", "group", "community" and "participation"; sometimes, I divide the participants into three groups and I request each group to think about the definitions of "group", "community" and "participation" (the definition of "human being" will be done later in a public discussion). I would like to say that participants always emphasize on this element that a group should have a common goal. But for a facilitator this is not important.

I always ask the participants, whether those standing in a bus stop are a "group" or not. If you think that a group should have an aim, then these people who are in bus stop and all of them would like to take the bus, should be a group, since there is a goal, a common goal. But we know that this is not a group. By the time there is not 'interaction" among them, it is not a group. Interaction means that they have to talk to each other, they have to listen to each other, there should be some kind of interconnection among them.

There are so many examples that clarify why "interaction" is a necessary element. To my point of view, this is the way to create the group. Participants in a group talk to each other; they try to find common ground, they try to search for those things that can be used as resources; they listen to each other; and they can know and understand. This has to be done in a respectful environment. A facilitator can play a major role in creating such environment.

People come together, shape a group through interaction, and create an identify for the group; such identity or group identity helps them to be more connected to each other; a relationship based on "trust" shapes among them. They define certain values and regulations. Gradually they find their way and define their goal. They use their own resources and recognize their own differences. In this way, they experience a process of empowerment within the group. All these happen because of "interaction".

See the following slide on "power"; There are only ten slides, but it is going to connect the concept of "power" and "empowerment" based on a definition of group with an emphasis on "interaction".

http://www.slideshare.net/saeidnourineshat/power-saeid-nourineshat

All techniques, the process, and all a facilitator does, have to contribute to "interaction".

See also this presentation (updated on first of September 2013):

http://www.slideshare.net/saeidnourineshat/how-does-a-facilitator-look-at-group

Biodiversity Products

GEF/SGP has a global online portal for biodiversity products. Biodiversity “products” are any consumable, usable, artistic, or medicinal remedy created from the wealth of biodiversity. One of the foundations for sustainable development is acknowledging biodiversity’s value for local communities and the global community. 

When I was working in Touran villages as a facilitator, a series of products were produced and now these products have got "online" in the portal and I am happy. I thought it would be good if I share this happiness with you and to put their links here so that you can have a look at them. 

All these products are made by hands, they are environment-friendly and produced by rural women who work together in their own cooperatives. 

For the wall carpets see the following link:
http://www.biodiversity-products.com/products/iran/asiatic-cheetah-wall-carpet/

Courtesy of GEF/SGP - Iran

For kilims, see the following link:
http://www.biodiversity-products.com/products/iran/traditional-kilims/

Coutesy of GEF/SGP - Iran

For gourds with designs of Asiatic Cheetah, see the following link:
http://www.biodiversity-products.com/products/iran/asiatic-cheetahs-on-gourd-carving/

Courtesy of GEF/SGP - Iran

Two more products recently added:

1) Integrated Pest Management Rice:
http://www.biodiversity-products.com/products/iran/integrated-pest-management-rice/

2) Art & Conservation: Patterns for making cloth animals of sensitive and endangered species.(Emperor Spotted Newt/ Lorestan Mountain Newt/Neurergus - Iran
http://www.biodiversity-products.com/products/iran/art---conservation:--patterns-for-making-cloth-animals-of-sensitive-and-endangered-species.(emperor-spotted-newt--lorestan-mountain-newt-neurergus/

I hope many other biodiversity products from Iran can be posted to this global portal.

Visit to Kuala Gula ! A friendly village, three hours far from Kuala Lumpur

I had a great chance to be with Mehdi Almasi and Parvin Pakzadmanesh, both PhD students, to go to Kuala Gula to help Mehdi to fill his questionnaires on SWOT analysis of the participatory management of Matang Mangrove Forest. Kuala Gula is a fishing village near the sea and most of its inhabitants are involved in fishing.
For several reasons, I found that these people are really hospitable. When we arrived to the village, we went to a coffee shop which seems to be managed by a woman. Everybody was very kind to us. First of all, there was a Chinese Malaysian who really explained about the village, they even invited us to Ice-Lemon-Tea, and after being with them for some time and explaining about our work (while some people filled some of the questionnaires), we left the village to Kuala Sepetang (another village), and then they seemed to be waiting for us, as we told them that we would come back in the afternoon.

One strange thing was that again a Chinese man living in the village invited us to dinner and even bought for us a dinner (Nasri Goreng Sayur Sayuran). They really helped us in filling the questionnaires. There was one young lady who acted like a facilitator and was explaining about the questionnaire to others who were sitting round a table. In summary the behavior of the community members towards these three students who were trying to connect to these people were much friendly. Do not forget that we had the language barrier too. Not so many people talked in English, while their Malay was not good. Anyway, we had really a good time and a fruitful experience over there.
I wrote these lines as an appreciation to what they did to us today. These people were really hospitable and we really enjoyed ourselves.

But this visit gave me a good opportunity to think more. When communities are somehow far from cities, when the people within the community are more close to each other, the community seems to enjoy from a solidarity that can help its members. I do not know and it is very difficult to say it without evidence, but I am sure those people whom we met today - who are not rich people - are living in peace. I am sure they have a good life since they seemed to be happy. That's something I found over there.

Microfinance under scrutiny!

On Friday (22nd March 2013), I attended a seminar on micro finance entitled "'Evaluating' Microfinance: Academic irrelevance" by Professor Salim Rashid who is the visiting professor of the department of development studies in the Faculty of Economics and Administration in the University of Malaya. In the abstract provided before the seminar, the professor has explained that the choice of Microfinance (MF) by the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) as the primary means of poverty alleviation should have brought clarity to the role and functioning of MF, but instead it seems to have generated a fog. It is desirable to take a fresh look and start from first principles to clear the air. Microfinance is microfinance --- it is finance writ small. If finance works, microfinance works. Much of the difficulty has been created by academics and arises from scholars treating MF as though it is some new economic phenomenon. With a series of specific questions, and with the Bangladeshi case in mind, it will be argued that many of the interesting and constructive questions have not been on the research agenda. Instead, the attempt to rely on randomized controlled trials is serving to distract.

Before giving more details about the seminar, first let me clarify why I have added this text on microfinance here in this blog. When I was working in villages, the micro finance was one of the choices we were focused in certain areas where sustainable livelihood was targeted. However, the way we were working was based on "group initiatives" rather than individual endeavor. In our model, there is always a group as an entity that will be involved in micro finance. As a facilitator of group activities, I think this works better than the individual initiatives for various reasons.

Professor Salimm said that microfinance requires special attention. He also mentioned that it is culture and context oriented. It means that those applying for finance, they have to have certain habits (such as to be organized); without these habits they cannot easily enter business to generate money. He said most of the time, the people use finance as consumption loans. They use the money for other necessary things in their life and then for returning the money, they might apply for another loan. Here the story starts and never ends. Loan after loan. In fact, people have to use the money in an income-generating business with a good profit to be able to return the money and the interest to the Micro Finance Institute. The professor gave a series of examples to clarify the issue. He said that there is not enough empirical data on success of microfinance, especially there seems to be a lacuna in intertemporal research.

To my point of view, group activities (based on group facilitation) where people can share their own experiences and resources - is very important in micro finance, especially when people earn "hot money". Loans are only "cold money" that cannot generate money. They can complete the capital, but what is more important is the "hot money" generated by the group in a well-defined business with defined role for every member of the group.  

Days before the New Year: not a good time for a meeting

New Iranian year starts with the “spring”. That is a good sign for a country of four seasons like Iran where “spring” as a season is a time for flowers to flourish, for trees to boast of their attractive and colorful blossoms, and for the sky to rain on mountains, deserts and plains (we call it "spring rain" or "baran bahari"). For families, the days ending to the New Year is a time for a full-fledged cleaning as we call it in Iran “khaneh tekani”. All family members have to participate in such a tedious work. Families may rush to bazaars to buy new clothes and shoes, suits or other new things; With the new year to start, everything can become new and fresh (I hope people do not fall into a culture of consumerism and try to use and reuse those things are still usable). The municipality cleans towns and cities (not every year, of course). In certain communities, people come together to clean the community too. Also it is the time for planting young saplings. Many environmental NGOs plan sapling-planting programmes starting from two weeks before the New Year when the cold weather gradually finishes.

With all these events and ceremonies, there is always another expectation: this is a time for evaluation. This is a good idea and I really welcome that. However, in practice, the story is different. Why? Because, nobody has enough time for a group meeting. People in villages are busy with their own local activities for the New Year; some people are thinking to have trips to other places; and as I explained many people are involved in pre-Norouz activities; therefore it could be an over-expectation from the members of a group to have meeting before the New Year. As a facilitator, even me, I have always been busy before the New Year and then I could not be in a community or in a village to facilitate a meeting. There is not even a good time for evaluation workshops. Therefore, my suggestion, based on my experience, is to forget all about a meeting before the New Year.

Norouz creates a time of refreshing, and while we take distance from all our group activities, it can be an appropriate time to think about new things, creative ideas and effective changes in the group. All group members may be requested to think about these issues, and the first meeting after the new year, could be a meeting of brain storming about such ideas.

However, when a “year” ends, there is a tendency to produce “annual reports” or "evaluation meetings" and as I told, such reports or meetings are really necessary. This will help to the scale-up of the community empowerment. But they should not be done during the days of “Norouz-busy-time”. The framework could be designed months before, and the information and data to be collected beforehand. Even an evaluation meeting is necessary to be held by the group one month before the year ends. 

In certain cases, where it seems required to have a meeting before the new year, then "facilitating a diachronic meeting" could be a good choice. The facilitator has to dedicate much time for contacting the group members without holding a meeting. The feedback and comments are transferred to the members of the group while it seems a dialogue is on-going. The facilitator has to be much talented to go through this time-consuming process. However, the output may be existing. This is exactly like discussions under a message or an image in the facebook. Those online put their message while others may become online afterwards and read the discussion and give their comments. There might be some synchronized inputs but mostly people contact each other in a diachronic way. In a diachronic process, there is no need for a meeting, while the facilitator tries to manage the interaction.

At the end of this short comment, I would like to say: Happy New Iranian Year 1392.